Chapter 3: The Mysteries of the Kingdom

So often, as I have struggled with perplexing questions, like the question of theodicy, I have found clarity and direction in the words of the Lord. It is important to remember, as primary children loudly proclaim in song, that the word of God is the iron rod and we must always keep at least one hand holding tightly to it if we are to avoid deception, distraction, and losing our way in the mists of darkness that Lehi saw in his dream. I have been struck and frankly surprised by how often a verse or two of ancient scripture is perfectly designed to address a major challenge or problem we face in our contemporary walk of discipleship. This is true of Mormon Magic, however, in this case, the verses we need to help us discern how we can and should relate to both Godly and deceptive forms of magic have themselves been clouded and sometimes used in a more deceptive manner, albeit unintentionally. Only through miraculous revelatory assistance in our day can we understand the verses of scripture we so desperately need to address the challenge of Mormon Magic.

To find our way to these precious clarifying and guiding verses, we begin in the New Testament, in the Book of Matthew, chapter 7, verse 6, which reads, “Give not that which his holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you”. Though this verse is shrouded in metaphor and allusion, allowing for many interpretations, I have historically understood this verse in the way many of you likely do: Don’t share sacred things with people who won’t respect, understand, or appreciate them.

This interpretation accords with many of the teachings of church leaders. For example, we are discouraged from reading from our patriarchal blessings from the pulpit or from showing them to people outside of our family. We are strongly warned against sharing the sacred activities that take place in the temple outside of the temple. We are also taught to be cautious in sharing personal spiritual experiences publicly. The message accompanying many of these warnings and teachings is typically that we ought not share these things too broadly because we don’t want our precious spiritual pearls to be misunderstood or worse to be dirtied, trampled, or used against us by those who do not appreciate or respect their sacred nature. These warnings to exercise discretion in sharing sacred things make a lot of sense and there is much in this verse as it is translated in the King James version of the Bible that is useful to us in practicing that discretion.

Know your Audience, Know Yourself, and Know the Context

One very helpful insight of this verse might be that it teaches us to know our audience. That is, before you share something sacred and precious to you, you should know if you are speaking to an audience of “dogs” or of “swine” or of some other type of people. This is very useful advice, advice that would have helped Jane’s sister if she had considered it prior to sharing her sister’s miraculous recovery with Lisa’s ward just one month after Lisa’s passing. Had Jane’s sister known of the circumstances in which her audience found themselves on that day, she likely would have thought very differently about throwing out the pearl of her sister’s experience that is so dear to her in that testimony meeting.

Please understand, this is not a judgment on Lisa’s ward or family. I am in no way comparing them to dogs, swine, or any other animal. That is one of the problems with the King James presentation of this verse in Matthew. It can be easy to blame the audience for our not being able to share holy and sacred things, especially when terms like dogs and swine are used. Yet, I doubt Jane’s sister, if she learned what was going on in that ward on that day, would blame Lisa’s ward and family for having a hard time with her story about her sister, and I doubt you do either.

No, this is not about blaming either Jane’s sister or the congregation. It is about the challenge of knowing whether and when one could and should choose to share their sacred pearls. This challenge typically lies less within the sharer or within the audience as it does between sharer and audience. It is in that "between" space of communication where things can get very confusing and where it can be difficult to discern what should be said or how what is said should be interpreted and understood. Indeed, it is in this “between” where dogs and swine can emerge and things intended to be holy can seem to become unholy.

Think of it. There are surely hundreds of other wards Jane’s sister could have visited on that day, and in those other wards she could have shared the exact same story with little or no trouble for the audience. Similarly, someone other than Jane’s sister could have visited Lisa’s ward that day and could have shared a very different miracle story that made no contact with the grief and anguish of the congregation. There again, no trouble would likely have emerged between speaker and audience. Thus, it is not only a matter of the content of the message. It is also the context of speaker and audience that is so critical to the holiness or profanity of things, to pearls and dogs and swine.

Speaking of the importance of context, let’s take a little time to think about the historical context that situates the reference to dogs and swine and pearls in this verse. Several helpful commentaries on the Bible teach that dogs and swine were considered by Jewish law and custom to be unclean, indeed among the most unclean of beasts (and, not just because they can get really dirty!).

Thus, to give something holy, like flesh that has been offered as a sacrifice, to a most unclean animal, like a dog, would be a desecration and sacrilege. For this reason, dogs were to be given only unholy meat and never holy meat. In this case, then, the common way in which we interpret this scripture would seem to ring true: Don’t share your sacred and holy experiences and knowledge with those who would desecrate and mistreat them. Only share your precious sacred knowledge with “clean” people.

This is one way to look at it, but it is quite problematic. As a missionary, I was going door to door and street to street and teaching all manner of people the gospel. I was sharing many sacred and holy things, including my personal spiritual experiences with them, as all missionaries do. Some of these people proved to be “unclean” in the sense in which these commentaries describe it.

I remember, for example, one particular day when the missionaries in our district were handing out fliers in the walking zone of the town I was serving in, St. Polten, Austria. The church building had just been refurbished and the fliers were an invitation to an open house. As we gave people passing by an invitation we would attempt to talk with them about the church building and the gospel. I approached one man and gave him a flier. He took it and I asked him if he had heard about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He said he had not and then I proceeded to tell him about it, about the good news of the gospel, and about what that good news had meant in my life.

The man listened for a while and then after I shared my love of the Savior and my testimony of the church with him, he looked me dead in the eye and asked, “Do you know who I am?” I said, “No, I do not.” He said, “I am the Devil” and then he took my invitation, tore it into tiny pieces, threw it in my face, and walked away. I have to say after seeing the look in his eyes that I almost believed him!

Like missionaries, all of us have covenanted to share our witness of the Savior, our pearl of greatest price, with all people, including those who may turn out to be more unclean than we had hoped; that is, who are more like dogs or swine. Until the moment arrives when our shared message and their disregard for it as holy come together, we cannot know if our audience is clean or unclean, or whether some individuals in the audience will shift in that moment to become like dogs or swine while others will not. Indeed, under the right circumstances, any one of us can become like a dog or like swine. Consider what Ellicott says about this in his commentary:

"Are we, then, to class our fellow-men under these heads, and to think of them as dogs and swine? Is not this to forget the previous teaching, and to judge with the harshest judgment? The answer to these questions must be found, we may believe, in thinking of the dogs and swine as representing not men and women as such, but the passions of this kind or that which make them brutish. So long as they identify themselves with those passions, we must deal cautiously and wisely with them. St. Paul did not preach the gospel to the howling mob at Ephesus, or to the 'lewd fellows of the baser sort' at Thessalonica, and yet at another time he would have told any member of those crowds that he too had been redeemed, and might claim an inheritance among those who had been sanctified. We need, it might be added, to be on our guard against the brute element in ourselves not less than in others. There, too, we may desecrate the holiest truths by dealing with them in the spirit of irreverence, or passion, or may cynically jest with our own truest and noblest impulses."

In this sense, knowing our audience is not as easy as we might think. Indeed, knowing ourselves is not that easy either! Any of us can shift into having an "unclean" passion or the character of a dog or a pig at any time. So, what then are we to make of this verse in Matthew and can we confidently share our holy and sacred experiences and knowledge with anyone at all?

Of Dogs and Meat

Before we address these questions in full, let us look further into this concern. Consider this: dogs have no ability to discern meat that is holy from meat that is unholy. To a dog it is all just meat that satisfies hunger and a dog will gobble up whatever you feed it, all the same. I think of our family's beloved little Yorkie, Bailey.

Bailey should not eat chocolate. It will make her sick and in sufficient quantity it can kill her. Yet, when she sits by the table (or, as you can see, sometimes at the table) hoping for a scrap of food, she will eat the stray chocolate chip that falls as quickly and happily as a piece of ham, even if she has vomited it up in the past and will surely vomit it up again. She appears to have no discernment for what is good or bad for her. She happily ingests it all.

Similarly, when we go to the pulpit and share a “faith promoting story” can we be confident that the audience will be able to discern the difference between what is holy and what is profane in our words? If they are in a state of mind that is unclean, we should be doubtful, but even if they are striving to be clean, there is good reason to be concerned. I have observed people speak from the pulpit during testimony meetings with tears rolling down their cheek and feeling all the sincere and deep emotion possible as they proclaim how much they love their spouse and their children and how grateful they are to have these people in their life. I don’t mean to put this too harshly, and maybe I have been in a dog state of mind when I have heard this, but the thought has crossed my mind as I have witnessed such a “testimony” that an atheist could be standing there and crying and feeling emotion just as sincerely as the believer as he expresses his love for his wife and family. What is the difference? Are they both equally holy? Are neither of them holy? It can be hard to tell.

This is the bane of discernment. It is difficult to distinguish what comes from God and is holy and sacred from what comes from our own mind, emotions, or perhaps even from a darker source. After all, it is all “meat”. Its appearance can be indistinguishable and it can all fill our spiritual stomachs and seemingly satisfy our yearning, at least for a time. However, if it is not “meat” that has been sanctified and made holy by God, then it can make us spiritually sick. Worse than that, we can come to depend upon the wrong thing for nourishment.

Let’s return to my cute little Yorkie for a moment. She is dependent upon me and my family for the nourishment she needs and whatever we feed her that is what she knows and lives by. If we only ever feed her marshmallows then that will be all she knows and she will live her life accordingly, with sugar highs and diabetes and gum disease as her “normal”. Or, if we feed her a mixture of things good for her and things bad for her, which is far more likely with a large family, then she will eat it all indiscriminately and her body, health, and temperament will come to reflect that eclectic diet also.

In similar manner, if we share with each other only or primarily that which is unholy, or a mix of unholy and holy things, as spiritual nourishment, then our individual and corporate (i.e., congregational) bodies will tend to reflect that diet. Whatever we are fed will be considered "normal" spirituality and we will come to depend on and expect that form of nourishment. In other words, if we subsist solely on spiritual marshmallows, then we will see and experience the world and our spiritual lives in a marshmallow-tinged way. More importantly and more likely, if we live off of a mix of real magic and deceptive magic we will not know how to distinguish between the two and we will live as if they are one and the same, happily gobbling up the mix of the two forms put in front of us, even as one of those forms will make us spiritually sick. As a result, we will not be living “pure religion and undefiled” as James taught (1:27) and we risk being nourished by and yoking ourselves to something other than Christ alone.

Swine and pearls

Swine present a slightly different issue than dogs. They too are considered unclean, but unlike dogs they are more skilled at distinguishing what can nourish them from what cannot. They can tell the difference between pearls, which are of no value to them, and grains and legumes, which they need for nourishment. No matter how valuable pearls may be to you, they are of no value to pigs, so they leave them on the ground and trample them under their feet as they look for something that can actually sustain them. More than that, if you keep giving them what is not good for them and what they do not need, they may turn on you and rend you.

Ellicott describes it this way in his commentary:

"The second comparison [to swine] may possibly imply, as in a condensed fable, the disappointment and consequent rage of the swine at finding that what they took for grain was only pearls. We are to beware lest we so present the truth, either in direct teaching or by an undiscerning disclosure of the deeper religious emotions of the soul, to men, that we make them worse and not better than before."

Ellicott’s words are very poignant, especially his statement that we must beware that we do not make other people worse than before. This ties back into the story of Jane’s sister and the effect of her testimony on Lisa’s husband and children and the congregation. She would never have wanted to offer the congregation something intended to promote faith that turned out to be completely empty of spiritual calories. Yet, that appears to be precisely what took place. Lisa’s ward was not edified, did not understand, and would not rejoice together with Jane’s sister as she might have supposed. On the contrary, some were disappointed, offended, and perhaps even outraged by her ignorant offense.

It would appear from the verse in Matthew that Jane’s sister’s pearls should not have been cast out in her testimony that day and that they did more harm than good, not because the people in the audience were inherently like swine or because her pearls aren’t genuinely of great worth to her and to Jane and to her family, but in that context and in that ward at that time, her pearls are of no worth and can provide no spiritual nourishment to those desperate spiritually hungry people. Indeed, using Ellicott’s words, Jane’s sister appears to have made Lisa’s husband and family as well as the congregation “worse and not better than before.”

At this point, the questions pile up. Can we ever really know our audience? How can we tell who might be having a dog or a swine kind of day? Is what is holy and precious to me going to be holy and precious to those I share it with? How can I make sure that when I share an example of the first form of magic that it doesn’t become the second form of magic for those receiving it? How do I promote faith instead of becoming a stumbling block for the faith of others? As audience, how can we distinguish what is holy from what is unholy when it is offered to us together as spiritual nourishment?

The Joseph Smith Translation

By itself, Matthew 7:6 is inadequate to answer these difficult and perplexing questions. In fact, as we have shown, it raises more questions than it answers and appears to add confusion rather than reduce it. Thankfully, when Joseph Smith set about translating the Bible, this is one of those verses he was inspired to address. And address it he did. The Joseph Smith translation of Matthew 7:6 adds several phrases and verses of great importance that contextualize and clarify the meaning of the original verse 6 and help us with our concern of Mormon Magic. Here is the translation, found in Matthew JST, verses 9-11:

9 Go ye into the world, saying unto all, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come nigh unto you. 10 And the mysteries of the kingdom ye shall keep within yourselves; for it is not meet to give that which is holy unto the dogs; neither cast ye your pearls unto swine, lest they trample them under their feet. 11 For the world cannot receive that which ye, yourselves, are not able to bear; wherefore ye shall not give your pearls unto them, lest they turn again and rend you. Note that verse 9 tells Christ’s followers exactly what they can and should say to all: Repent. Repentance is truly and properly spiritually nurturing and it can always safely, though also deftly, be shared from a pulpit, in a church classroom, in a family home evening lesson, in an investigator’s home, or during a ministering visit. Anywhere we go at any time, we can teach anyone about the atonement and the repentance it makes possible. We can share how Christ has brought the kingdom of heaven nigh unto us by suffering for all of our sins. Jane’s sister could have spoken with complete confidence about this in her testimony and she could know undoubtedly that speaking of the atonement, repentance, and the greater proximity of God’s kingdom to all of us as a result of Christ’s condescension cannot hurt or hinder the faith of the hearer who has ears to hear. It can only invite the spirit who will testify of all truth and dwell in the hearts of those who will receive it.

So, if all we had from the JST was verse 9 alone, we would know precisely what any one of us can and should say to any audience without having to worry if we are practicing the deceptive and illusory form of magic: “Repent, for the kingdom of God is nigh”. Fortunately, the JST provides additional verses that give us even more helpful instruction concerning the challenge of Mormon magic. Specifically, after teaching us what we can and should say to others, Christ teaches very clearly in verse 10 what we should not share with others: “the mysteries of the kingdom”. Instead, we are commanded to keep the mysteries of the kingdom within ourselves.

What are the mysteries of the kingdom? There are many mysteries. Some of these, as already mentioned, include Patriarchal blessings and sacred temple ordinances. In addition, as discussed in chapter 2, a mystery of the kingdom would include something sacred that a person or persons have experienced, but cannot explain or generalize beyond themselves. Jane’s sister, for example, experienced an incredible miracle right along with Jane and her husband and all of the family.

For Jane and her family, her healing is a wonderful and a true gift from God. It is the first form of magic, godly power having an amazing healing effect. However, because Jane and Jane’s sister do not know why this miracle was granted in Jane’s case, it is a mystery of the kingdom. They know faith was exercised. They know priesthood blessings were given. They know the cancer receded. And, they know the will of God was involved.

However, Jane and Jane’s sister do not know why this miracle happened or how God’s will was involved and they certainly do not know why many others who suffer from cancer and other terminal illnesses do not heal, but die. They actually know nothing about all of that and certainly not enough to say or promise anything to others. Beyond Jane and her family’s experience lies an abundance of mystery and in that mystery, when it is not kept within ourselves, lies the risk of deception and illusion.

Now, we can understand as we read the next familiar phrase in JST verse 10 about throwing pearls before dogs and swine, that the mysteries of the kingdom are the pearls that we must not throw out into the world. We must keep what we have experienced, but which we ourselves cannot understand, within ourselves, or we risk doing what Jane’s sister did in Lisa’s ward, and we invite all the trouble discussed earlier in this chapter. We risk becoming unintentional practitioners of the second form of magic. We risk implying, if not explicitly offering, promises about things we do not understand and cannot control. We risk appearing to know the will of God and of being spokespersons for that will. We don’t mean to do it, perhaps, but we do it nonetheless when we share the mysteries of the kingdom, and by doing this, we inevitably become false prophets, because we do not have the sealing power and we cannot bring about in heaven what we proclaim here on earth. Jane’s sister had no intention of doing any of this, of course, and she may not have read or understood this verse or the Joseph Smith translation of it. Yet, she did hurt the faith of Lisa’s husband and family and congregation to a significant degree.

Verse 11 of the JST teaches that this outcome is precisely what will occur when we fail to keep the mysteries of the kingdom within ourselves. The world, it says, which includes anyone with whom we share a mystery, members of the church or otherwise, cannot receive the things we ourselves cannot understand. Thus, when, from the pulpit, in a class, or with an investigator, we tell about an experience in which we or someone we love was healed, or got a desperately needed job, or was protected from an accident, and we imply or tell the audience that the healing resulted from faith, the job from paying a full tithe, and the accident from praying for protection that morning, it may all sound good and right, and even faith promoting, but the people listening to us cannot receive it. How could they receive it when we ourselves do not actually know why in each of these specific cases and not in others the outcome that resulted took place? There are faithful sick people like Lisa who don’t heal, after all, just as there are full-tithe payers who are broke and bankrupt and there are horrible car accidents every day that mangle and kill people who prayed for protection that very morning.

We, ourselves, are not able to bear the mysteries of the kingdom. We have inklings and intimations and in some cases fully developed theories, but we do not have a solution to the problem of theodicy. We rarely know why our suffering endures while relief comes to another and even when we do know why it happens for ourselves, we cannot answer for the experience of others. And, I like you, have seen the problematic consequence of sharing what we ourselves cannot bear (i.e., understand) many times. The trouble may not emerge immediately in the way it did with Lisa’s husband, family, and ward, but at some point, perhaps in a poignant time of darkness and despair, or perhaps when someone who was encouraged by Jane's story put their faith in her experience and it didn't work out the same way, or perhaps when a family chose to pay a full-tithe and did not have enough money to pay the mortgage and lost their house, or perhaps when the prayerful person injured in a car accident is laying in a hospital bed with a crushed lung, a body cast, and an amputated leg. Perhaps then, like Lisa’s husband, that person will trample the mystery that was shared and was implicitly or explicitly promised them, and they will turn and rend the sharer, if only in their mind. They may decide that they have been swindled, cheated by God, tricked by him, and abandoned by him. They may question their faith and question whether they are as unholy dogs or unworthy swine who don't deserve holy and good things. They may believe that they have found that dark corner of the universe where God doesn’t bless his children and doesn’t relieve their suffering or reward their faith.

Conclusion

Like you, I know too many loved ones who were fed regular meals of the mysteries of the kingdom, which they could not bear, and then turned away. Instead of, or in addition to, saying “repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come nigh unto you”, their leaders and parents and friends spoke of miracles upon miracles upon miracles with confidence and a surety of their seemingly causal connection to strong faith. They may have heard about someone audibly hearing a voice of warning to get out from under a car just as a jack fails and the car slams to the ground. Perhaps they have heard about a mother praying over a baby’s swelling head turning black and blue from a hard fall that subsequently returns to normal size and color. Maybe they have heard about a father getting a raise at work to the exact amount needed to fund a child’s mission. They may have even heard about visitations from loved ones who have died in which much needed guidance or comfort was given. They have possibly even heard about severe burns healing without a scar following a healing blessing. They might also have been told the stories of soldiers protected from gunshot fire or bomb explosions. Each of these stories comes from a lesson manual or church magazine, so surely some or even many of our loved ones who have left, have heard these mysteries of the kingdom. And, some may have even heard, as I did, about a family in massive debt and about to lose their house being prompted by a dream to buy a lottery ticket which won them one million dollars (more on that in a later chapter).

Many of my loved ones who have turned away from God, like many of yours, did not mean to develop their faith on the basis of these mysteries of the kingdom, but as with my little Yorkie, when you are fed a certain kind of food for your whole life, you take for granted that it is the right food for you. You become accustomed to it, even if its consequences for your health are not promising. These loved ones, our precious brothers and sisters, like so many of us, learned to at least intermingle the mysteries of the kingdom with the foundational principles of the gospel, if not to rely on those mysteries for their faith and testimony. Then, when they sought for divine assistance in a time of great need and the blessings they heard so much of over the course of their lives did not come and the miracles described in all those stories they listened to for all those years failed to occur for them, they experienced a crisis.

For some of our loved ones, when this crisis hit, it struck them like an indictment of their inadequate faith and they pointed the finger of blame at themselves. They believed the absence of a miracle like those they heard of so many times at church revealed them to be unworthy and undeserving of the miracles other people receive. For others, they pointed their finger at the church, seeing all the talk of miracles and blessings as promoting a grand fiction that is now shown in the most personal and painful way to be untrue, and this they decide indicates that the church is untrue. Still others, pointed their finger at God, denying his existence or his concern for them, for if they can find no evidence of miracles in their lives and they have done nothing to be unworthy of those miracles, then it must mean that there is no God at all or God does not care for his children, or at least some of them.

When so many of our own “fellowcitizens . . . of the household of God” are unable to bear the mysteries of the kingdom and then, despairing, leave the church or deny God altogether, then it becomes all too clear that “the world” will not be able to receive and bear these things either. Do we want people to join the church because of the blessings and miracles we have shared with them, when we ourselves cannot explain them, at least beyond our own experience? Do we want to share experiences of miraculous healing, financial windfalls, promotions, safety from accidents, and visitations from beyond the veil with our children when we have no idea if any of these things will occur in their lives?

Why can’t we keep the mysteries within ourselves? Why can’t we find more than enough spiritual calories to keep us going and energized on the path of discipleship in teaching repentance, in placing our faith in Christ alone, in sharing the redemptive miracle of his atonement, and in giving thanks everyday for the blessing of his perfect love? What is it about sharing magical stories and experiences that is so enticing that we fail to abide by the clear teaching of this scripture and instead take the risk of injuring the faith of our loved ones and others by sharing the mysteries of the kingdom that we ourselves cannot fathom?